If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

As far as I'm concerned this is open-source democracy at its finest. The vast majority of Gnome users are on x86 desktops with GPUs, so focussing development for this environment is the sensible option. Maybe things will change in the future, but there aren't enough devs to support it at the moment.

See this is the problem with both canonical and gnome and other open source idiot devs. They say they will create something new and they do that while saying they will also maintain the older version. After releasing the new version they realize that maintaining the previous version is actually work and it's boring since you don't add stuff but fix bugs so they justify it and no longer maintain it. This is what is fucked up. They supported it until now and now they got bored. This is what is wrong in open source. Nobody wants to do what is neccessary, only what is cool. And apparentely that shitty gnome shell is cool for now. Just wait a few years when they'll say that gnome shell is shit and move on to some other bullshit desktop.

IMHO it's great that Gnome 3 is like it is. Would be pretty boring if it looks and behaves almost the same as Gnome 2 or XFCE 4.10. Also since Gnome 3.4 or even 3.2 the behavior and look can be easily changed via extensions. What's the issue with Gnome 3 again? Was it missing configurability which actually is there via extensions?

yes, please do go away and ideally shut up too. let us know how you get on with windows 8 too, i'm sure you'll love that.

good work dodging the point that you've never contributed a single fucking thing to open source, so slagging others - who do actually contribute, day-in day-out - off for not doing more is hideous. i know being 13 years old is tough, but don't take it out on the internet please.

interesting timing (from my perspective)

I stuck with a semi-gnome environment (using fallback + compiz over Gnome-Shell) for quite a while, but recently i switched out Gnome for KDE.

I find the timing of Gnome (announcing) dropping Fallback-mode interesting, since i literally dropped Gnome as my DE the same day. I still have gnome installed and do use many gtk+ apps, but i think at this point for me ~ my days of using any DE made by Gnome developers are over...

But at the same time (on another note) - i do think them dropping fallback is probably good if they don't want the burden of maintaining it, nor wasting the resources that could be put to better use.

anyway, great to see them making decisions and thus progress, even if i don't plan to use their DE anymore.

...now, if gnome could just figure out a way to not break themes on every point release, i would be very happy with them (since breaking gtk3 themes affects people not even using Gnome).

Hmm .. I didn't have any real problem with Gnome till now. Except the broken themes at least. I even found it fine to use as a DE. But after reading some things here .. I truly didn't expect them to go this far ..... Truly, if Gnome dies it might even be for the better .. :/
I was never tied to a specific DE myself anyways, but I'll try to bother myself with Gnome as little as possible...
Not putting effort on allowing users to customize everything I totally understand, but trying to actively prevent it and causing problems even for people not using Gnome .. No, that's just too much. I won't miss them, they won't miss me, bye Gnome.

so like one could apply that to gnome3 too: "why don't they switch to XFCE/KDE/etc, where they have all the freedoms?"

The difference is that rekonq isn't even part of the default install on most (all?) kde distros. You have to go get it and use it instead of konqueror. (also, it is the same rendering backend as konqueror - it just looks more like crome from a UI point of view)

Just contributing doesn't help anyone! We need contributing that fucking helps! If I contribute a patch that gets accepted because maintainers are morons and it fucks your computer up I think you would complain wouldn't you? You wouldn't say : yeah but he is contributing I am not! No! You would tell me to go fuck myself with all my retarded code! What is this attitude that I contribute so it doesn't matter if I actually help or run things into the ground?

Hopefully someone review your code before they ad it. I don't see the problem...

who started it? gnome users. Since the first line of gnome code was created, gnome users festered in kde threads attacking, trolling and being just as obnoxious as they can. Just look back at KDE 4.0.

But a KDE user just voicing a tiny bit of well deserved criticism in a gnome thread? Scandalous! Go away! You have no right to post here.

you shouldn't come with "who started it" for two reasons:
1. a stupid statement remains stupid no matter if it is an answer to another stupid one or not
2. looking back to at kde 4.0 is a joke in the matter of "who started it first".
3. if you look more back then you will see that one of the main reasons why kde earned so much hate which now evolved in an often unexplained antipathy, is that kde on the older versions tried to impress with tons of features but was one of the worst coded things a computer engineer ever saw. kde was for a long long time the quality joke of the linux world, the windows in the linux world. a lot of blinky blinky, patching it together overtime to not explode on the first click.

even though i had only a short look into kde 4.x( can'T exactly remember which version it was) it seemed a lot better than what i knew from kde 2.x, 3.x. but i can't get over what i saw in the past i refuse to believe that people that created such a mess really learned how to do things better. they patched it better.

but i admit, this is a probably a short coming of my own. today there are other devs on kde than in the past and they maybe changed a lot internal things to the good. i just tell you that so that you maybe understand WHERE IT STARTED!

is that kde on the older versions tried to impress with tons of features but was one of the worst coded things a computer engineer ever saw. kde was for a long long time the quality joke of the linux world, the windows in the linux world. a lot of blinky blinky, patching it together overtime to not explode on the first click.

Can you name some concrete examples?

since you know the code so well, this should be easy, otherwise people might think that you're making all of that up.

I've been using Linux since 1999 and KDE has always had the reputation of being well engineered.